From an interaction with a Calvinist: Calvinist: Most Calvinists believe in a soft determinism called compatiblism [sic.]. This is clearly taught in Gen 50:20: “But as for you, you meant evil against me; but God…
Posts By Ben Henshaw
An Arminian Response to John Hendryx on the Meaning and Implications of Spiritual Death Part 3: John Hendryx Concedes That it is a Plain “Fact” that Faith Precedes Regeneration
[You can find part one of this series here, and part two here] John Hendryx continues his response to the “synergist” visitor: Finally, your attempt to overturn the doctrine of total depravity relies entirely too…
An Arminian Response to John Hendryx on the Meaning and Implications of Spiritual Death Part 2: Dead Reckoning
Continuing from Part 1… Hendryx begins his response to the visitor: (John) Dear Brother …You say, “monergists take the ‘dead in sin’ phrase too far” but, I would turn that around to say that you…
An Arminian Response to John Hendryx on the Meaning and Implications of Spiritual Death Part 1: What Does it Mean to be “Dead in Sin?”
Calvinist John Hendryx takes a “synergist” to task in an article entitled Can We Make an Exact Analogy Between Unbelievers’ who are “Dead in Sin” and Believers who are “Dead to Sin”?(Excerpts From Debate in…
Ben Henshaw, “Does Arminian Theology Suggest That We Depend on Ourselves Instead of Christ for Salvation?”
From the late R.C. Sproul’s Ligonier Ministries we find a short article “praising” limited atonement by Richard Phillips. For the purpose of this post we will be focusing in on a section that promotes a…
Great Quotes: Thomas Ralston on the Compatibility of Freedom and Foreknowledge With Regards to Judas Betraying Jesus
It has been said that “knowledge is power;” but it is not implied by that expression that it is a power capable of exerting itself. All that is implied is, that it directs an active…
Grace For All: The Arminian Dynamics of Salvation (Book Review)
John D. Wagner has produced an updated and expanded version of “Grace Unlimited”, originally edited by the late Clark H. Pinnock. This updated version is called “Grace For All: The Arminian Dynamics of Salvation.” This…
Richard Watson on “Who Maketh Thee to Differ From Another?” as an Argument for Calvinism
1 Corinthians 4:7, “For who maketh thee to differ from another?” The context shows that the apostle was here endeavoring to repress that ostentation which had arisen among many persons in the Church of Corinth,…
Calvinist Sleight of Hand: A Brief Arminian Interaction With Wayne Grudem’s Arguments Against the Compatibility of Foreknowledge And Conditional Election
A while back someone on the SEA discussion board referenced the following comments by Calvinist Theologian Wayne Grudem arguing against the compatibility of foreknowledge and conditional election. Below is my brief interaction with this quoted…
Does Paul Support Calvinism’s View of Irresistible Grace in 1 Cor. 4:7?
The following is a comment I made in response to a Calvinist appealing to 1 Cor. 4:7 to show that unless faith is an irresistible gift from God, it would give us reason to boast. Links to…
Sin, Reprobation and Foreknowledge: The Calvinists Attempt to Have Their Cake And Eat it Too
The doctrine of the unconditional election of a part, necessarily implies the unconditional reprobation of the rest. I know some who hold to the former, seem to deny the latter; for they represent God as…
Do Arminians Really Pray Like Calvinists?
It is often said by Calvinists that when Arminians pray, they pray like Calvinists. Typically this is expressed in such a way as to imply that while Arminians may deny the theological claims of Calvinism,…
Calvinism on the Horns: The Problem of Divine Foreknowledge in Calvinism and Why You Should Be an Arminian
Calvinists often lead the charge against Open Theism and traditional Arminians agree that Open Theism is Biblically problematic. However, Calvinists often seem to hide the unfortunate implications of their own view of foreknowledge. Open Calvinism?…
A Telling and Ironic Tweet by John Piper on “Waking up in the Morning” as a Believer
Calvinist John Piper recently gave the following Tweet: I fall asleep quietly confident that I will be a believer in the morning not because of my free will but God’s free grace. This is an obvious…
Romans 9 in Context (John F. Parkinson)
Click the link below to see John F. Parkinson’s solid and concise interpretation of Romans 9 from a non-Calvinist perspective. Please note that while Mr. Parkinson seems to approach Romans 11 from a pre-trib dispensational…
An Arminian Response to C. Michael Patton’s “The Irrationality of Calvinism” Part 5: Taking The Mystery Out of Mr. Patton’s Strange Arguments
Part 5: Taking the Mystery Out of Mr. Patton’s Strange Arguments
Patton: These two issues, human freedom and sovereign election, are not contradictory when put together, but they are a mystery.
This is the same claim Mr. Patton made in his first post called “Why Calvinism is the Least Rational Option.” We have already begun to highlight the problems with this claim.
An Arminian Response to C. Michael Patton’s “The Irrationality of Calvinism” Part 4: Returning the Favor (Reversing the Argument)
Part 4: Returning the Favor (Reversing the Argument) Patton: To the Calvinists, man is fully responsible for his choice, yet God’s election is unconditional. This creates a problem. It creates great tension. I agree that…
An Arminian Response to C. Michael Patton’s “The Irrationality of Calvinism” Part 3: False Assumptions and Question Begging
Part 3: False Assumptions and Question Begging
Patton: Therefore, [according to Arminianism] God’s predestination of people is “fair” and makes sense. After all, there are too many questions left unanswered when one says that God chooses who will be saved and who will not. Why did he choose some and not others? Did God make people to go to hell? Is God fair? “Why does he still find fault, for who resists his will?”
The Arminian chooses this position because, for them, it is the only way to reconcile human freedom and God’s election.
Here is where Mr. Patton really missteps.
An Arminian Response to C. Michael Patton’s “The Irrationality of Calvinism” Part 2: Theological Imprecision and Misrepresentations
Part 2: Theological Imprecision and Misrepresentations
Patton: However, I think we need take a step back and see that while the shoe fits when it comes to some particular issues in Calvinism these accusations are far from forming the bedrock of the primary issues in Calvinism. You see, one of the many reasons I am a Calvinist has to do with the tension that is allowed within the Calvinistic system that is not allowed in other systems.
The central core of Calvinism primarily centers on one doctrine: predestination. While the sovereignty of God has its place, it does not ultimately determine where one lands.
This is highly debatable among Calvinists. This may be Mr. Patton’s opinion, but I think that he is probably in the minority.
An Arminian Response to C. Michael Patton’s “The Irrationality of Calvinism” Part 1: The Set Up
C.Michael Patton is the President of Credo House. He has now written two separate and similar posts defending the “irrationality” of Calvinism as actually being a strength of the system, specifically over and above Arminianism.…
Recent Posts
Roy Ingle, “Calvinism and the Atonement”
Why Does God Deny the Opportunity of Choice for or Against Him to Young Children Who Die and the Mentally Impaired?
Mark K. Olson, “Wesley’s ‘Warmed Heart’ at Aldersgate – What Really Happened?”
Adam Roe, “The Crucial Thread of Prevenient Grace: A Wesleyan Perspective on Divine Drawing”
